Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The attitude era. Taking off the rose tinted glasses was it really that good ?

Options
  • 21-09-2016 6:22pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 39,677 ✭✭✭✭


    I was watching the network for the first time in ages last night and just browsed through some of the ppvs and raws from the attitude era.

    I mean some of the stuff was great and exciting and even after all these years it still got a pop over it. But there was some utter **** stuff produced and it seems in 1999 at least the match length/quality was a afterthought which I do put down to that pro wrestling asshole vince russo.

    I mean would triple H have got his main event push he had if austin wasn't out for nearly a year ? I don't think so personally.I know he won the title while austin was there but still. He wouldn't be jerking the curtain but main eventing maybe not.

    Also some of the stuff did go over the line and even watching it last night and previously it hasn't aged well or become more acceptable.

    I don't know maybe it's because I'm older but five years ago I thought the AE was the bees knees but now because of the network not so much.


Comments

  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,670 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bounty Hunter


    Match quality was far lower and chair shots etc retrospectively were a poor choice but the show in general was far more compelling across the board from the commentary being in the moment and making things genuinely seem like big deals to the writing of the character and their less overly scripted promos which came off as more real.

    Back then many of their buzzword style catchprases actually rang true like how anything can happen in the WWF, you would regularily be shocked bywrestlers actions, screwjobs, big returns, face /heel turns etc while now things just seem far more a cookie cutter predictable fare, The much more appealing 2 hour format also helped as the product which was also hot in pop culture at the time was not totally over saturated as it is now.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,553 ✭✭✭Blue_Dabadee


    I tried watching ever single RAW from 1998, but I got bored of seeing Austin vs. McMahon feud every single week since we have seen soo much of it.

    I do enjoy watching from late 1999 to Spring 2001 when we got the best of Attitude Era. Rise of TLC brothers, 24/7 Hardcore rule, great mid-card and main event scene, etc.


  • Registered Users Posts: 45,552 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy


    I think it's remembered fondly because of the sheer number of stars that were there: Austin, Rock, Mankind, Undertaker, Triple H, Kurt Angle, emergence of the Vince character etc.,

    How many stars of a comparable level have been created in the years since? In all honesty probably just John Cena. I think that's why people look back fondly on the period, and tbh it's probably understandable.

    There was a lot of trashy nonsense and Russo was behind much of it. Beaver Cleavage etc. But people forget the bad when they look back.

    Another factor is the power of nostalgia.

    I was on a Youtube vid recently on Raw from 2005 and I checked the comments and there were people saying how this was when wrestling was at its best. I found that amusing as I remember back in 2005 people were longing for the years gone by. I think it's human nature to have a fondness for what you grew up on.


  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 12,013 Mod ✭✭✭✭jaykhunter


    Pretty important to note that WWE have been beating the Attitude Era nostalgia with a stick since the Attitude Era. No opportunity to give those memberberries a dust off. Austin and the Beer Truck, Mick Foley wins the world title etc. It was perfect for the time and a massive shift from the New Gen Era. The PPVs showcased their most lackluster component (the in-ring) but damn, catch the RAWs. Like the go-home show to WM13. Bret Hart's empassioned rant is a thing of beauty. On PPV you gotta sit through Road Dogg vs Bossman and Godwinns vs Headbangers! I think people miss the massive star appeal, captivating promos and the crazy storylines.

    I'd equate the Attitude Era podcast like a house party when you were in college. Lots of drinking, swearing and sex (hopefully!) it didn't make much sense but was an incredible night. Modern Day WWE is like an office job.


  • Registered Users Posts: 39,677 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    I agree with the chair shots not being a wise choice and not all the chair shots just the ones where someone skull was rattled due to them being unprotected. I mean I've said it before but even Paul Heyman regrets those unprotected shots.

    Are you talking about those my sacrifice videos jaykhunter ? I posted it in some thread and it got a nostalgic response and yes as I said the attitude era was great but I've been in a reflective mood recently and i took off the rose tinted glasses and it dawned on me that it's wasn't perfect.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 12,013 Mod ✭✭✭✭jaykhunter


    Not specifically, I meant that any milestone RAW/SD or WWE DVD is bound to have something nostalgic about AE and a few talking heads admitting it was the best (and subtext of it's better than today). The last one I watched had Stephanie admitting such! It's very shoot-yourself-in-the-foot way of doing business!


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,534 ✭✭✭KKkitty


    It is a touch of nostalgia on my part anyway but the Attitude Era was the best there was and the best there ever will be. The current product is to saccharine sweet and years ago spoilers weren't a thing really because not every fan had internet. The violence was more graphic in nature and there was a real sense of danger involved. Storyline quality has decreased too. One week Natalya is feuding with Charlotte and the next it's someone else. It's kinda all over the place.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,983 ✭✭✭✭chopperbyrne


    The matches weren't as good and a lot of the storylines were poor, but everyone, EVERYONE, was over.

    Every match on the card had a story.

    Every wrestler had a character, which they got to develop themselves.

    Promos weren't scripted, they were just given a list of things to make sure they mentioned.

    There were proper divisions.

    About six to eight tag teams.

    Eight to ten lower card guys for the European, or Hardcore titles.

    Another eight to ten midcarders, any one of them easily and believably given an IC reign.

    Top of the card guys who could be in a title feud or grudge match.

    Most importantly, it was presented as if it was all real, and all mattered.


  • Registered Users Posts: 39,677 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    The matches weren't as good and a lot of the storylines were poor, but everyone, EVERYONE, was over.

    Every match on the card had a story.

    Every wrestler had a character, which they got to develop themselves.

    Promos weren't scripted, they were just given a list of things to make sure they mentioned.

    There were proper divisions.

    About six to eight tag teams.

    Eight to ten lower card guys for the European, or Hardcore titles.

    Another eight to ten midcarders, any one of them easily and believably given an IC reign.

    Top of the card guys who could be in a title feud or grudge match.

    Most importantly, it was presented as if it was all real, and all mattered.

    All good points but did the good parts of the attitude era and the nostalgia ruin the product going forward ? And I think that's unfair on the guys that came after and especially the current guys. They are being compared to a standard that none of the current roster will ever be able to get to. Just because it's pg now doesn't explain the poor enough storylines and booking. It was pg before the AE and it made sense most of the time and Vince and Patterson and Bruce Pritchard booked the tv by Vincent pool and it did alright.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,611 ✭✭✭✭ERG89


    Said it before and I say it again that period was so current at that time. You had 2 of the biggest stars ever peak so close to one another. The roster was weaker lower down the roster. Yet a lot of people still remember them cause even the Posse added something to the show. Nowdays the roster is almost entirely replacable, the lack of personality and charisma is clearly evident. WWE are telling people oh the Women's revolution is great & telling fans the Cruiserweight division features the best athletes in the world but I haven't been given a reason to care about any of them. People now blame Roman Reigns for the oversaturated product or vanilla characters clearly don't get that or Vince for only the negative aspects. Oh botched move there for fuçk sake Vince :rolleyes:
    People say oh the wrestling sucked then universally but imo Shawn Michaels, Kurt Angle and Chris Benoit 3 of the best of all time put on plenty of great matches. Guys like Guerrero, Taker, Hardy Boyz, Dudley Boys, E&C, Jericho, HHH, Foley, Austin & Rock had plenty of them too. The period after this then you had Lesnar, Booker T, RVD, Mysterio, a motivated Big Show was great to watch too & younger stars (back when y'know wwe could actually create them) show up.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 305 ✭✭Imnotthehulk


    I think unless you were there at time, it's hard to appreciate just how enjoyable the attitude era was. Now I'll fully admit I came a bit late to the show, getting back into it in 98, but not fully into it til 99.

    People like me, who were kids when Hulk Hogan and Andre The Giant were fighting were now beer swilling adults in our late teens, everything about it was aimed at us. You had beer drinking, fighting, cursing, crude humour, sexy women ripping the clothes off each other. It was everything you wanted. Especially if you were (like me) hungover on a sunday morning and smackdown was being repeated on sky one. Plus you had two electric stars in their prime in Steve Austin and The Rock. If either one of these was on the screen it didn't matter what else was on the show, you came away impressed.

    The pop culture world was a very different beast back then. Oz started on HBO in 97, and Sopranos didn't start til 99. Now you can get almost anything you want after a bit of typing on your phone.

    I have looked back and cringed at some of the stuff that was shown. Mae Young's hand being he obvious one.


  • Registered Users Posts: 734 ✭✭✭aaaaaaaahhhhhh


    I think it's human nature to have a fondness for what you grew up on.

    This is it for me.

    Back when if something wasn't logical and story-line fitting, we didn't care.

    When you were genuinely shocked at something without immediately thinking "ohh this is happening because............." and over analyzing the next 6-12 months from that one spot.

    When I think we actually cared about the investment we put into certain characters and if you missed Raw/Smackdown one week, it would take you at least two weeks to catch up(less of an issue now with the Internet etc)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,767 ✭✭✭Ben Gadot


    I've also found the Network detrimental to my memories of the era. I mean christ I remember as a kid thinking X-Pac was the ****....now I've realised he was just ****.


  • Registered Users Posts: 732 ✭✭✭Reebrock


    The Attitude Era holds up better in photographic form and video games than it does in video.


  • Registered Users Posts: 39,677 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    Ben Gadot wrote: »
    I've also found the Network detrimental to my memories of the era. I mean christ I remember as a kid thinking X-Pac was the ****....now I've realised he was just ****.

    Yeah that was my point I think the network was seen as a nostalgic vehicle where people who were fans during that would look back at it with rose tinted glasses but maybe the wwe overestimated the nostalgic factor.


Advertisement